Lords Sitting of 21 July 1864

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Highways Act Amendment appointed and nominated* (List of Members); Thames Conservancy appointed and nominated* (List of Members).
Report—Railways Construction Facilities* (No, 160).
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Exchequer Bonds (£1,600,000)* (No. 224); West India Incumbered Estates Acts Amendment* (No. 225).
Second Reading—Weights and Measures (Metric System (No. 164); Turnpike Acts Continuance, &c* (No. 214); Militia Pay*; Registration of Deeds (Ireland)* (No. 218); Poisoned Flesh Prohibition, &c. (No. 219); Expiring Laws Continuance * (No. 208); Highways Act Amendment* (No. 207); Ionian States Acts of Parliament Repeal* (No. 212); Turnpike Trusts Arrangements* (No. 211).
Committee—College of Physicians* (No. 114); Inclosure (No. 2)* (No. 177); Trespass (Ireland)* (No. 202); Sale of Gas (Scotland!* (No. 152); Naval Discipline * (No. 205) [H.L.]; Local Government Act (1858) Amendment* (No. 190).
Report—Burials Registration * (No. 144); College of Physicians* (No. 114); Inclosure (No. 2)* (No. 177); Trespass (Ireland)* (No. 202); Sale of Gas (Scotland)* (No. 152); Naval Discipline * (No. 205); Local Government Act (1858) Amendment* (No. 190).
Third Reading—Mutual Surrender of Criminals (Russia)* (No. 204) [H.L.]; Thames Embankment and Metropolis Improvement (Loans)* (No. 206); Isle of Man Harbours Act Amendment* (No.209); Militia Ballots Suspension *.

CUBA SLAVE TRADE.

  GENERAL DULCE.—EXPLANATION.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he had received a letter from his noble Friend, Lord Howden, complaining that when, in the observations he made the other evening in reference to the Cuba slave trade, he accused the Spanish Governors of Cuba generally of having taken bribes and encouraged the slave trade, he made no exception of General Dulce. The fact was, however, that he did state on the occasion referred to, that General Dulce formed an exception, and ten days before, in contrasting the conduct of the Government of Spain with that of Brazil, he bore testimony in favour of General Dulce, and the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary had also commended General Dulce's conduct. But praise did not penetrate the walls of that House as vituperation did, and the reason was that the former did not bear the same price in the market. If all the Spanish Governors had been but half as good as General Dulce, the slave trade would now be probably at an end. Lord Howden had expressed a strong opinion that the Aberdeen Act ought no longer to be maintained, because the Brazilians had entirely abolished the slave trade. Lord Aberdeen himself in 1856 declared that either in the event of the slave trade ceasing, or the Convention being renewed, he would be disposed to move for the repeal of that
  1782
  Act. Though not liable to the charge of having neglected to praise General Dulce, he had made an omission of which the Jamaica petitioners complained, and that was that he had not given Admiral Hope the credit so justly due to him. Admiral Hope was a gallant officer who had in every respect performed his duty with respect to the Cuban slave trade, and had also distinguished himself in the East. It was with the greatest pleasure that he bore testimony to his merits, as he was the son of a revered friend, the late President of the Court of Session in Scotland.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM) BILL.

  (No. 164.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  EARL FORTESCUE,having presented a petition in favour of this Bill from the Association of Chambers of Commerce of the United Kingdom, said, that the question of weights and measures had an hereditary claim upon his support, because he whose place he so unworthily filled succeeded in carrying through the other House of Parliament many years ago a measure establishing the system of weights and measures now the law of the land. After twenty years' experience of the; working of the present system, however, his late father was so convinced of the superiority of the metric system that he was one of the first to give his adhesion to the introduction, in a permissive shape, of the metric system in this country. The former Act was introduced in pursuance of the recommendations of a Select Committee, and the present Bill was equally the result of the unanimous recommendation of a Committee of the other House composed of men of all parties. It was unnecessary to remark that the present being a permissive Bill must necessarily remain a dead letter unless it were adopted by the free will of the people; but that it would be freely adopted by all persons engaged in trade, manufactures, and science, he had not the least doubt—in fact, the petition from the Associated Chambers of Commerce, which he had just presented, seemed to place the matter beyond doubt, as the petitioners might be fairly considered as representing the feelings of all practical men in the important towns they represented. Their Lordships must he fully aware of the variety of the measures

  1783
  of grain, wine, and beer which prevailed in different parts of the country. In some countries a bushel of wheat was 60 lbs., in some 64 lbs., in others 70 lbs.; sometimes it was sold by weight, sometimes by measure; the mode of measuring distances varied—in short, nothing could be more confused than the present system. The adoption of the metric system would cure this want of uniformity, and would substitute for that which was inconvenient and difficult to learn a system which was simple and easy to be acquired. The adoption of this system would save half the time which was at present occupied in making calculations. The very strongest evidence had been given in its favour by practical men. Among those who recommended its introduction, and some of whom employed it in the transaction of their own business, were the late Mr. Locke, the eminent engineer, who, having found the metric system in one of his foreign contracts so advantageous, that he adopted it for the transaction of his business in England; Mr. Whitworth, Mr. Robinson of the Atlas Works, Mr. Crossley, Mr. Anderson superintendent of the gun factory at Woolwich, Sir Rowland Hill, and Professor Graham the Master of the Mint. Scientific men were equally favourable to the metric system. The Jurors at the International Exhibitions of London and Paris said, that a great part of the benefit which might have arisen from the exhibition of the raw produce and manufactures of various countries was lost to thousands of persons in consequence of the difficulty of comparing the weights and measures and the moneys of one country with those of another. Professor Hoffman and Professor Owen, in their reports as Jurors of the Exhibition of 1862, referred to the confusion and discord which existed in the systems of weights and measures of different countries. The fact was that this confusion was so great, and so much time and labour were consumed in converting the weights and measures of one country into their equivalents in a foreign system, that practically the knowledge of one nation was a sealed book to the scientific men of others. As to the facility with which the system could be learnt there was the most conclusive testimony, and Professor Leone Levi summed up its general result to be that a boy could make the same progress in arithmetic taught according to the metric system in ten months as would according to
  1784
  the existing method take him two years and ten months to accomplish. Considering the value of youthful labour and the short time which could be spared to education by the children of the poor, this was a matter of some importance. He entreated their Lordships not to take any step which would impose upon these children two years of useless labour, and not to aid in preventing the free interchange of the manufactures and commodities as well as of the knowledge and information of all the people of the world. The noble Lord concluded by moving that the Bill should be read a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(Earl Fortescue.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYadmitted that there was a good deal of confusion attached to our present system of weights and measures, but desired to point out that, notwithstanding the pound had become the uniform measure by which all things were 3old, and that to introduce the metric system would be only to add another element of confusion. He would ask their Lordships whether, at this period of the Session, and, as a consequence, without due time for its discussion, it was desirable to pass a measure whose operation would be to create confusion in every market town in England? Believing that it was not, he should move that the Bill be road a second time that day six months.
  Amendment moved to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Six Months").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, he thought the Government would not allow the Bill to pass through their Lordships' House without expressing some opinion as to its proposal. If this country had passed through such a crisis as France passed in 1789 it might not be disadvantageous to introduce the metric system; but under existing circumstances, it not being proposed to abolish the present system, but only to allow the introduction of the new system pari passu with the old, he thought the confusion would be augmented rather than diminished. Nothing, he would add, but compulsory legislation would induce the people of this or any other country to give up the system to which they were accustomed in favour of one even more scientific and simple.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLL,speaking solely for himself, said that he had heard no valid argument urged against the Bill, and should

  1785
  vote in its favour. The fact, he contended, that almost all the Chambers of Commerce throughout the country supported it by their petitions was one of great importance for the consideration of the House, for it afforded a strong proof that many persons in the mercantile world were of opinion that to them, at least, the system would be advantageous. It was said that the operation of the Bill would be to add to the existing confusion; but it was, in his opinion, impossible to do that, at all events so far as Scotland was concerned. There were "bolls" and "bushels," varying in capacity, in almost every county in Scotland. He did not suppose that the habits of the people in various localities could be very easily altered in dealing with the local system of measures; but the proposed change would, he thought, be very generally adopted in the case of large mercantile transactions, particularly those transactions with foreign countries which were so greatly on the increase. It could only be used where both parties to a contract consented; they would only use it if they thought it convenient. It was not compulsory on any one, and therefore could do no one harm; but by allowing its use the effect might be that ultimately it would elbow out the present confused and defective system. The Bill, at all events, could do no harm, and he saw no good reason why their Lordships should not adopt it.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsupported the Bill, remarking that if men largely engaged in commerce wished for it, he saw no reason why the House should stand in the way of its passing.
  LORD BROUGHAMregarded the Bill as an important step in the right direction, and he hoped to live to see the decimal system in general use. He was, he might add, an advocate of the change not only in a commercial but in an educational point of view, and he had the testimony of Mr. Chadwick, to whose efforts the half-time system—one of the greatest improvements of our day—was due, to the effect that the introduction of the decimal system would shorten the time occupied in the teaching of arithmetic by one-half.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, it was a mistake to suppose that noble Lords on that side of the House were averse to the metric system as such. What they objected to was that a Bill of this importance should be introduced at that late period of the Session. Either the Government ought to take it up and pass it on
  1786
  their own responsibility, or there ought to be a Select Committee next Session to take the Bill into careful consideration. The argument that the Bill was only permissive was very much against it, for if it were right that all the weights and measures in the country should be equalized, it must be by a compulsory measure. A mere permissive Bill only added another element to the confusion.
  EARL FORTESCUE,in reply, said, that in all the countries in which the system had been introduced, its simplicity had caused it to work without any friction or opposition.
  On Question that ("now") stand part of the Motion? their Lordships divided;—Contents 34; Not-Contents 23: Majority 11.
  Resolved in the Affirmative: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

  CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor).

  Brougham and Vaux, L.

  Camoys, L. [Teller.]

  Churchill, L.

  Armagh, Achbp.

  Dartrey, L. (L. Cremorne).

  Somerset, D.

  De Mauley, L.

  De Tabley, L.

  Westminster, M.

  Ebury, L.

  Foley, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Houghton, L.

  Clarendon, E.

  Llanover, E,

  Effingham, E.

  Mostyn, L.

  Fortescue, E. [Teller.]

  Portman, L.

  Harrowby, E.

  Saye and Sele, L.

  Shaftesbury, E.

  Seymour, L. (E. St. Maur)

  Wicklow, E.

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde).

  Falmouth, V.

  Leinster, V. (D. Leinster).

  Stratheden, L.

  Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll).

  Gloucester and Bristol, Bp.

  Taunton, L,

  Wensleydale, L.

  London, Bp.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Hawarden, V.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore). [Teller.]

  Bath, M.

  Salisbury, M. [Teller.]

  Chelmsford, L.

  Churston, L.

  Colchester, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Denman, L.

  Carnarvon, E.

  Dinevor, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry)

  Egerton, L.

  Monson, L.

  Redesdale, L.

  Lanesborough, E,

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford).

  Malmesbury, E.

  Nelson, E.

  Templemore, L.

  Powis, E.

  Wynford, L.

POISONED FLESH PROHIBITION, &c., BILL—(No. 212.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD REDESDALE,in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that it had frequently happened that valuable animals, the property of other persons, had been destroyed by eating poisoned meat laid for the destruction of vermin; and this evil the Bill was intended to remedy. The principle of the measure was precisely the same as was sanctioned by Parliament last year in reference to poisoned grain.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(Lord Redesdale.)
  LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, that the second clause imposed a penalty of £10 for placing poisoned meat or other matter upon any land; and the consequence would be that the owner of any house or stack could not place poison, even in his own garden, for the destruction of rats, without incurring a penalty. It would be for their Lordships to consider whether the clause should not be modified.
  LORD CHELMSFORDobserved that by an exception in the first clause, an owner or occupier of land in Ireland could not place poisoned matter upon the land without first posting a notice that such was done; but he (Lord Chelmsford) could not understand how this notice would prevent dogs eating the poisoned meat.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, that he was not responsible for the details, for the measure had been altered in the Commons; and their Lordships know that in the other House exceptions with reference to Ireland were often inserted in measures which were under consideration. If the Bill were now road a second time the details could be considered in Committee.
  THE MARQUESS OF BATHthought that the exception practically excepted Ireland from the operation of the Bill, and in his opinion it was very desirable that England should be excepted also.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYthought it hardly desirable to proceed further with the Bill this Session.
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHthought that the putting of poisonous substances upon land by gamekeepers for the destruction of vermin was a great and growing evil; and in the south of Scotland he could state of his own knowledge that where
  1788
  strychnine had been used valuable shepherds' dogs had been killed by eating the poisoned vermin.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, he also knew that dogs and pigs were frequently poisoned, and pheasants likewise were destroyed. It was a curious and well-known fact in natural history, that though the maggots generated in the poisoned carcasses were not affected by the poison, yet they communicated the destructive effects to birds that eat them. Every reason which applied to putting poisoned grain upon land applied also to the placing of poisoned meat there.
  LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, he was certainly not in favour of laying poison for small birds, which, so far from being noxious, were extremely useful. If he could prevent the poisoning of foxes, and at the same time allow the poisoning of vermin, he would do so; but this Bill would prevent the latter, and would thus occasion serious inconvenience and injury. This was not a fox-preserving question on the one side and a game-preserving question on the other. It should be looked at as neither of those questions; but, believing that the Bill would be productive of mischief on the whole, he moved that it be read a second time this day three months.
  Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Three Months").—(Lord Wodehouse.)
  LORD PORTMANhoped their Lordships would not reject this Bill on the second reading. Many of the points to which objection had been made could be amended in Committee. He was sure that if in the Bill for prohibiting poisoned grain which passed last year a clause had been introduced to prohibit poisoned flesh it also would have been passed. Some noble Lords were most anxious to destroy the birds and others to destroy the animals. He knew that it was a practice of keepers to poison rabbits with strychnine, and place them in preserves to poison vermin. Now, if one of these rabbits should be picked up by any passer-by and eaten, the consequences might be deplorable.
  On Question, That ("now") stand part of the Motion? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 31; Not-Contents 18: Majority 13.
  Resolved in the Affirmative: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

  CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Churston, L.

  Colchester, L.

  De Mauley, L.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Denman, L.

  De Talby, L.

  Dunsany, L.

  Westminster, M.

  Ebury, L

  Foley, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Llanover, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Bucleuch and Queensbury).

  Mostyn, L.

  Portman, L.

  Redesdale, L. [Teller.]

  Harrowby, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford).

  Nelson, E.

  Romney, E.

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.)

  Saint Germans, E.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Stratheden, L.

  Falmouth, V.

  Taunton, L.

  Templemore, L.

  Camoys, L. [Teller.]

  Wensleydale, L,

  Churchill, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Armagh, Archbp.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore).

  Somerset, D.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Bath, M. [Teller.]

  Dartrey, L. (L. Cremorne).

  Airlie, E,

  Hatherton, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Monson, L.

  De Grey, E.

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Malmesbury, E.

  Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll)

  Powis, E.

  Wodehouse, L.[Teller.]

  Hawarden, V.

  Wynford, L.

  HIGHWAYS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
  Select Committee appointed and nominated. The Lords following were named of the Committee; the Committee to meet To-morrow, at One o'clock, and to appoint their own Chairman:—M. Salisbury, Ld. Steward, K. Romney, E. Powis, E. Do Grey, E. Eversley, L. Wodehouse, L. Hatherton, L. Stanley of Alderley, L. Egerton, L. Llanover.

  THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.
  Select Committee appointed and nominated as follows:—The Viscount Hutchinson (Chairman), The Lord Abercromby, The Lord Mostyn, The Lord De Mauley, The Lord Methuen; The Committee to meet To-morrow, at Eleven o'clock.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, Eleven o'clock.